These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Corp Kick Queue

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hana Lena
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2014-10-23 03:51:02 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
What about awoxxers who will lose a part of their playstyle because of this?

Who cares?

Everyone who's not invested in the idea of turning highsec into a carebear playground.

Oh please so long as I can sit in an NPC corp and play Eve solo with no real down side that I'll always be true.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#62 - 2014-10-23 04:13:04 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
KnowUsByTheDead wrote:
the biggest problem with the "unbalance" behind a safari is the existence of neutral logi.


Specifically the fact that you don't get suspect for assisting someone engaged in a safari. The situation is so ridiculous that neutral logi do not even normally fit tank.


For some time now it has been my suggestion that any pilot activating an "assist" style module should inherit any limited engagement flags from whomever they are assisting.


There is no limited engagement when you attack a corp member. If there was, there would be no problem since assisting in a limited engagement gives the logi a suspect flag.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-10-23 04:14:26 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
I think the kick queue should only work after a certain minimum number of downtimes... say, when you add someone to the queue, they're automatically kicked three downtimes later. If you want them kicked sooner, you have to do it manually.


Or have the kick queue not start working until 24 hours after the CEO tries to expel the member.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#64 - 2014-10-23 04:33:29 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
What about awoxxers who will lose a part of their playstyle because of this?


They'll follow the same path of any other activity that is adversely affected to a long-needed fix to corporation management. Adaptation. The issue of awoxxing is not something that needs to be fixed, nor do I believe that CCP is specifically targetting it, but the hassles of kicking characters from corp, when the corp leadership is not available to play right after downtime, is an issue that does need to, and is being addressed.
CCP Explorer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#65 - 2014-10-23 12:57:32 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
CCP Fozzie confirms that it is indeed linked specifically to DT for technical reasons: https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie/status/524085696974553088

If there's someone at CCP working on unlinking the corp-kick-queue from DT (and, say, linking it to session changes or logout) and would work faster with more pizza, please contact me Lol

That would be me! The initial version of the auto-kick will run on cluster start-up because it is the one time point when we can be certain that the kick will always succeed. Now that we (soon) will have the mechanism for adding characters to the auto-kick queue, we can then look at processing the queue at other occasions - either periodically, or on event (such as dock). The current planned behaviour is the one that has the minimal design change, and hence is the easiest one to start with. From there we can look at the general gameplay around changing corps whilst in space, as this starts to become a more complex issue with more interactions that need consideration.

BTW linking it directly to logout wouldn't necessarily solve the requirement of getting rid of someone who doesn't want to leave, because a] they can just not log out, much as they don't do already, and b] even when they do, their ship is still in space for some time. If you've managed to catch a war-target and they can use this feature to logoffski with a kick-queue, you don't want their ship to suddenly leave the corp and become a non-legal target. This is the sort of thing I mean where we'll need to take a look at the overall gameplay around joining/leaving corps whilst in space.

And yes, we're fully aware of the problems that DT causes, particularly for players in timezones such as yours. This is the sort of thing we have in mind when we do things like fix up sig IDs to stay consistent over downtime. We are trying to tackle this on three fronts:
1) Make downtimes shorter
2) Make downtimes less painful (eg preserving sig IDs)
3) And ultimately trying to get rid of them as a daily occurrence
I believe we're making decent progress on 1 and 2. Work on part 3 is still ongoing
Confirmed that 3) is still ongoing.

Regarding 1) then at 11:00 the cluster automatically goes into VIP mode, kick everyone off and then starts processing the shutdown (mostly finalising persisting state). Once shut down daily database scripts are run (some are run shortly before downtime, such as fleet fight dedication requests are mapped prior to downtime), the server then autostarts and is generally available between 11:06 and 11:08.

If there is a deployment then we have turned off autostart prior to 11:00 and manually start the cluster once all deployment activity is completed. On those days the server is normally available between 11:14 and 11:24.

Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson | Senior Development Director | EVE Online // CCP Games | @CCP_Explorer
Saucilita Crisp
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#66 - 2014-10-24 11:00:44 UTC
This seems very silly to me. Some are claiming these changes will affect what they are liberally calling their "playstyle".

Tough beans. Your play style is based on crappy unrealistic mechanics. There is literally no reason to support the continuation of a corp not being able to remove you from itself while you're actively damaging those within it. That's dumb. That's not a play style, that's a CCP forgot to make this not stupid before now.

If the only argument that can be made is "Garsh, I can't awox now and that's bad because I can't awox now", it's obvious that person has no argument about the actual mechanic itself or how it makes absolutely no sense for you to be able to remain in a corporation that doesn't want you in it anymore.

I didn't even realize this kind of mechanic abuse was even possible before the dev posts on this change. Seems like something I would have fixed a long time ago because it seems to me to be a bug or just plain shoddy design. Glad to see it's getting changed and a form of awoxxing eliminated by removing the what was basically abuse of a bug(or at the very least what should have been considered a bug).
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#67 - 2014-10-24 18:21:49 UTC
Saucilita Crisp wrote:
This seems very silly to me


Exercise: change a few words in your post to refer to other activities in eve and see how much it affects the validity of your argument.

You are simply saying that a play style should be removed because you don't like it.
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#68 - 2014-10-24 21:37:18 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
What about awoxxers who will lose a part of their playstyle because of this?

Who cares?

Everyone who's not invested in the idea of turning highsec into a carebear playground.

Carebear? Playground? That sounds excellent. The only thing that could possibly improve it would be some bacon.

Solid +1 from me!

Bacon makes us stronger
Dave Stark
#69 - 2014-10-25 07:53:04 UTC
just going to point out that, once again, neutral logi is the issue with awoxing, not the kick mechanics.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2014-10-25 08:15:43 UTC
In before the first day we get an auto kcic k bug and every single player is kicked from its corp.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Adira Nictor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2014-10-25 10:59:30 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
In before the first day we get an auto kcic k bug and every single player is kicked from its corp.



Now that would be funny.
Haedonism Bot
People for the Ethical Treatment of Rogue Drones
#72 - 2014-10-25 17:06:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Haedonism Bot
Just once I'd like to see a dev post saying that they plan a change to buff highsec PvP, rather than nerfing it again. Just once, and preferably not as an April Fool's joke or something. That would be nice.

Balance, CCP. Sometimes it is arguably necessary to nerf a beloved playstyle for the health of the game, although I don't think this is one of those cases. However, the "villain" playstyle has seen only nerfs over the years - hundreds of them. A buff from time to time would be nice, in the interest of balance.

www.everevolutionaryfront.blogspot.com

Vote Sabriz Adoudel and Tora Bushido for CSMX. Keep the Evil in EVE!
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#73 - 2014-10-25 23:55:14 UTC
hey we could also do an invite queue....

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#74 - 2014-10-26 16:31:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Dave Stark wrote:
just going to point out that, once again, neutral logi is the issue with awoxing, not the kick mechanics.

Neutral Logi is indeed a very serious issue which needs to be dealt with, however the kick mechanics currently make zero sense other than to prevent exploitation in other situations. It is a serious, but separate, issue.

I'm all for proper tools to do "industrial espionage" and give corps some interesting vulnerabilities, but the current kick mechanics don't make much practical sense and are more than a little immersion breaking.

For the eccentric few interested in my personal opinion I discuss the corp kick queue briefly here:
Virtual Realms Episode 4

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#75 - 2014-10-28 15:33:19 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
just going to point out that, once again, neutral logi is the issue with awoxing, not the kick mechanics.


Being unable to remove someone from corp was still stupid no matter what is or is not the problem with awoxing. If people think the 1 downtime CD is too short, then they should fight to have that extended to let's say auto-kick happening on the 2 downtime or whatever but at the end of the day, having to alarmclock to remove a corp member is stupid.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#76 - 2014-10-28 16:04:33 UTC
It always pissed me off that the CEO doesnlt have 'kick anyone at anytime' power. Regardless of shares, roles, in or out of space.

The ceo of a company irl doesn't have to wait till the company is closed or the worker to go home to fire them. Its a simple, you are fired, gtfo.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#77 - 2014-10-28 16:15:46 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
It always pissed me off that the CEO doesnlt have 'kick anyone at anytime' power. Regardless of shares, roles, in or out of space.

The ceo of a company irl doesn't have to wait till the company is closed or the worker to go home to fire them. Its a simple, you are fired, gtfo.


The game code prevent that. If it did not prevent that, it would be abused.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#78 - 2014-10-28 16:50:36 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
DaReaper wrote:
It always pissed me off that the CEO doesnlt have 'kick anyone at anytime' power. Regardless of shares, roles, in or out of space.

The ceo of a company irl doesn't have to wait till the company is closed or the worker to go home to fire them. Its a simple, you are fired, gtfo.


The game code prevent that. If it did not prevent that, it would be abused.



Oh I understand that, I don't agree with it however heh

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.